Jehovah's Witnesses can donate blood

by Marvin Shilmer 37 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Vanderhoven7

  Marked
• 

  smiddy3

  This has been a fascinating thread and I wonder how I ever missed it .However with all due respect to Marvin ,in my 32 years as a JW I cannot for the life of me see any BOE in any congregation on earth not having a serious problem with any JW donating their own blood for any purpose .

  They just would not believe that the GB has ever authorised such a thing.And no matter what you showed them it would be dismissed as apostate lies.

  Admittedly I have not been able to watch the Blog as it has been taken down and I wouldnt have a clue if their is any way to retrieve it ?

  With my 32 years as a JW from 1960 on and now out for approx .26 years I have never come across this thought before ? Which to me is very surprising as it has so much implications attached to it.?

  And if anything I have come across quite the opposite. The WT has come out against JW`s donating their own blood in case of future emergency`s for them that may occur in the future .

  It should / would have been an ongoing topic for years surely ?

  Thank you for resurrecting it Vanderhoven7
• 

  Cjackson

  Smiddy3:

  If you'd like to see a copy of Cliff's letter, it was published in the folliwing book:

  Three Dissertations on the Teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses, by Greg Stafford, 2002 ISBN 0-9659814-2-8

  I know for a fact the letter is real because I was married to Cliff Roche when he wrote the letter. I understand your statement regarding the probability of the local elders knowing nothing about this letter, much less the rank and file. I feel WT response was a form of legal ease, a "covering their butts" sort of letter. In addition to pedophile cases, I'm sure they have had their fair share of lawsuits because of their stance against blood transfusions. I am no longer married to Cliff, but you will be shocked (maybe, lol) when you read their hypocritical response. Had I known the letter would become famous among ex Witnesses, I would have kept a copy. I remember the day it arrived at our house. We were both shocked at their answer to Cliff's question.
• 

  Cjackson

  Smiddy3:

  If you'd like to see a copy of Cliff's letter, it was published in the folliwing book:Three Dissertations on the Teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses, by Greg Stafford, 2002 ISBN 0-9659814-2-8

  I know for a fact the letter is real because I was married to Cliff Roche when he wrote the letter. I understand your statement regarding the probability of the local elders knowing nothing about this letter, much less the rank and file. I feel WT response was a form of legal ease, a "covering their butts" sort of letter. In addition to pedophile cases, I'm sure they have had their fair share of lawsuits because of their stance against blood transfusions. I am no longer married to Cliff, but you will be shocked (maybe, lol) when you read their hypocritical response. Had I known the letter would become famous among ex Witnesses, I would have kept a copy. I remember the day it arrived at our house. We were both shocked at their answer to Cliff's question.
• 

  smiddy3

  If its not violating any copyright laws or anything is there anybody out their who could reproduce this letter mentioned by Cjackson of Cliff Roche`s letter ?

  However :

  you will be shocked (maybe, lol) when you read their hypocritical response. Had I known the letter would become famous among ex Witnesses, I would have kept a copy.

  Cjackson,is the reply also contained in the book you mention ,however you just didn`t keep the letter/reply yourself. correct ?
  
  
• 

  TD

  So have the JW's ever stated (Formally or informally) an official position on apheresis blood donation?
• 

  Cjackson

  Smiddy3:

  No unfortunately I don't have a copy of the letter. Basically the letter said that donating your own blood for the purpose of obtaining blood fractions to be used in your own treatment was a conscience matter. It said you would not be disfellowshipped for doing it. But, as all WT legal ease, it said if you did you would effectively be disfellowshipping yourself from Jehovah's org. Typical double speak. I wonder how that would work? You donate your own blood, and you aren't ousted. Would you be able to go in service, or answer at meetings? That was not explained. It was almost like a don't ask, don't tell policy. But the fact that you would NOT be disfellowshipped was a shock, at the time. I'm sure they have found themselves on a slippery slope with the blood issue, and have likely paid many wrongful death lawsuits to unbelieving family members. So you can do it, the elders won't take action, they'll just wait for Jehovah to kill you. That's the deal as best I can remember it.
• 

  Doctor Who

  The stance right now is that if you accept a blood transfusion, OR if you donate blood you are effectively disassociating yourself.

  ...a committee
  (not judicial) should obtain the facts and determine the
  individual’s attitude. If he is repentant, the committee
  would provide spiritual assistance in the spirit of
  Galatians 6:1 and Jude 22, 23. Since he is spiritually
  weak, he would not qualify for special privileges for a
  period of time. In some cases, it may also be necessary
  to remove other privileges, such as commenting at
  congregation meetings and presenting student
  assignments on the midweek meeting. Depending on
  the circumstances, the committee may also need to
  arrange for an announcement to the congregation at a
  midweek meeting: “The elders have handled a matter
  having to do with [name of person]. You will be glad to
  know that spiritual shepherds are endeavoring to
  render assistance.” On the other hand, if the elders on
  the committee determine that he is unrepentant, they
  should announce his disassociation...